[Tadpole9181]

If one commissions an artist to paint child porn, the artist is still the one guilty of producing and distributing child porn. If I contract a company to host a child porn website, they are still hosting a child porn website!

Furthermore, even if I don't make the painting, if I see it and distribute it anyway, I'm still distributing child porn. You don't get to just say "whoopsies, I didn't make it, how could I possibly know the open and visible image was illegal?"

Grok isn't making paint. It's not making monitors. It doesn't send you graphics software. It itself produced pornographic images of real children and distributed them to pedophiles for profit.

And even if we wanted to give them the benefit of the doubt, after this came to light and they got in trouble, they disabled this capability for free users while allowing paid users to continue. They knew what they were doing at that point, so no more ignorance plea.

At least open model producers are just distributing software that can produce illicit images. But because they don't actually do it, they can wash their hands of responsibility.